Plenary 8: Assessing Project Feasibility · The IRR measures the rate of return on a stream of...

Plenary 8: Assessing Project Feasibility

Tuesday, 14:00 to 15:00

Session agenda

1. Introduction

2. Economic and financial viability concepts

3. Key considerations to determine if a project is viable

Page 1

4. Basic metrics and issues to consider

5. Solutions to viability gaps

6. Summary and further reading

1 2 3 4 5 6

Introduction

Is investment in new

public infrastructure

economically justifiable

Page 2

economically justifiable

and, if so, is PPP the

right approach?

1 2 3 4 5 6

Session agenda

1. Introduction



Page 3




21 3 4 5 6

Economic & Financial viability concepts

Economic viability

When deciding whether an investment is economically justifiable, the public

sector should:

• identify the costs and benefits of the project, including ‘externalities’;

• prepare a cost-benefit analysis (using an appropriate discount rate to be

applied to future costs and benefits); and

• calculate the economic return of the project.

Page 4

• calculate the economic return of the project.

The initial evaluation of a public-sector project should include to widest possible

range of costs and benefits, including:

• Long-term financial benefits of a new facility compared with continuing to

operate the existing one, e.g. maintenance cost savings

• Other benefits which can be priced, e.g. journey time savings

• Wider economic or social benefits or costs, also known as externalities

21 3 4 5 6

Economic & Financial viability concepts

Externalities

The term ‘externalities’ is used to describe the economic, social, environmental or

other effects of a project, the benefit or cost of which cannot be charged to users

of the facility. Externalities may include:

• Economic development, e.g. increases in land values or general economic

activity

• Effects on safety or public health, e.g. reductions in accident deaths once a

Page 5

• Effects on safety or public health, e.g. reductions in accident deaths once a

new road is built

• Environmental impact, e.g. decreases (increases) in noise or air pollution

Externalities cannot easily be included in the costs paid by Concession users. The

existence of positive externalities could justify the introduction of public-sector

support for a project, in the form of subsidies

21 3 4 5 6

Session agenda

1. Introduction



Page 6




31 2 4 5 6

Determining if a project is viable

• A discounted cash flow (DCF) calculation is used to allow for the different

timing of costs and benefits

• The proposed means of funding for the project is irrelevant in a CBA, since

economic benefits are independent of this

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)

Cost-benefit analysis compares the benefits of a project its cost, to assess

whether a project is viable

Page 7

economic benefits are independent of this

NPV of project benefits, plus

NPV of positive externalities

Benefits: Costs:

NPV of project costs, plus

NPV of negative externalities

Any project with a cost-benefit ratio over 1 is viable

The benefit of a public–sector project can be assessed as:

31 2 4 5 6


Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

If the benefits of a project cannot easily be measured, then the costs only of the

different solutions would need to be compared – this is known as a cost

effectiveness analysis

Page 831 2 4 5 6

• The discounted value of a cash flow is determined by reducing its value by the

appropriate discount rate for each unit of time from the time at which the

cashflow is being valued (i.e. today,) to the time of the cash flow occurs – the

discount rate is normally expressed as an annual rate

• A discounted cash flow (DCF) calculation is the NPV of a series of future


Discounting is the process of finding the present value (i.e. the value today,) of

an amount of cash at some future date

Page 9

cash flows

Example:

• Assume discount rate is 10% per year

• Assume a set of cash flows of $100, $100 and $100 over a three year period

• At its simplest, the value of the cash flows in today’s terms in valued as follows:

o Year 1: $100 / (1-10%)1 = $90.9

o Year 2: $100 / (1-10%)2 = $82.6

o Year 3: $100 / (1-10%)3 = $75.1

o Total value of cash flows = $248.6

31 2 4 5 6

Choosing a discount rate

Public-sector Discount Rate

The question of what discount rate to use for assessing the viability of a public-

sector investment decision is a difficult one. Approach varies considerably by

country

• The choice of discount rate is crucial in determining the present value of a project’s

cashflows and, therefore, whether the project is viable or not

o If the discount rate is too high, the effect may be to undervalue the benefit of

Page 10

o If the discount rate is too high, the effect may be to undervalue the benefit of

cashflows which occur some considerable time in the future

o As a public-sector investment typically involves an initial negative investment

followed by years of positive cashflows, the lower the discount rate, the more

attractive the investment will seem

• No ‘right’ discount rate to use – could use a range of discount rates

• Alternative approach - use the risk-free rate as discount rate, but perform sensitivity

analysis on project cashflows

31 2 4 5 6

Session agenda

1. Introduction



Page 11




41 2 3 5 6

Basic metrics

Net Present Value

NPV is the value today of a sum of money due in the future, discounted at the

cost of money.

The formula for an NPV calculation is:

PV= FV

(1+i)n

Page 12

• If the total NPV of project cashflows, discounted at an agreed discount rate, is

positive the project can be justified

(1+i)n

Where:

PV = present value, i.e. ‘money today’

FV = future value, i.e. money in the future’

i = the interest or discount rate; and

n = the number of periods , e.g. annual semi-annual etc. (with discount rate adjusted accordingly)

41 2 3 5 6

An NPV calculation can also be used to calculate which is the better of two

projects with different cashflows

NPV example

Investment A Investment B

(a)

Year

(b)

Discount

factor

[(1+0.1)(a)]

(c)

Cash flow NPV

[(c)÷(b)]

(d)

Cash flow NPV

[(d)÷(b)]

0 1.0000 -1000 -1000 -1000 -1000

Page 13

Clearly Investment A is the better project. The differences in the NPV calculations illustrate

the importance to investors of the timing of cashflows

1 1.1000 340 309 200 182

2 1.2100 305 252 235 194

3 1.3310 270 203 270 203

4 1.4641 235 161 305 208

5 1.6105 200 124 340 211

Total 350 49 350 -2

41 2 3 5 6

Basic metrics

Internal Rate of Return

The IRR measures the rate of return on a stream of project cashflows over the

life of a project. It is the discount rate at which the NPV of the project cash flows

is zero

• Limited value in project feasibility assessment

Page 14

Economic Rate of Return (ERR)

ERR is a method for the public sector to measure the net benefits of a project

• In an ERR calculation, the investment has to pass an IRR hurdle rate equivalent

to the public-sector discount rate to be considered viable

41 2 3 5 6

Basic metrics

Uses in PPPs

DCF and IRR calculations are used in a variety of different ways by different

parties to a PPP project

By the public sector…

• DCF used when deciding whether to proceed with the procurement of a project –

Economic Rate of Return (ERR) may also be used in this case

Page 15

• DCF used in the Public-sector Comparator

• DCF used to evaluate bids for a PPP project

By investors…

• Project IRR may be used to assess the financial viability of a project without taking

account of its financial structure

• Equity IRR commonly used as a hurdle rate for investments – investment justified if Equity

> x%

41 2 3 5 6

Basic metrics

In PPP contracts…

• Equity IRR may be used to calculate Service Fees compensation for changes in

circumstances during the life of the PPP contract or refinancing gains

• DCF may also be used to determine compensation to investors for early termination of a

PPP contract

By lenders…

Page 16

By lenders…

• Project IRR used to calculate Loan-Life Cover Ratio

41 2 3 5 6

NPV and different-sized projects

When comparing two different projects, account has to be taken of their relative sizes

Issues to consider

Investment C Investment D

(a) Original investment -1000 -2000

(b) Cash flow 1 year later 1400 2600

NPV @ 10% 273 364

Page 17

Investment D has a higher NPV than investment C because of its larger size. An IRR

calculation shows that Investment C is the better investment. To better compare these

investments, the NPV comparison should be expanded with a full cost-benefit analysis

IRR 40% 30%

Cost-benefit analysis

(c) NPV of benefits [= NPV of (b)] 1273 2364

(d) NPV of costs [= (a)] 1000 2000

Cost benefit ratio [(c) ÷ (d)] 1.27:1 1.18:1

41 2 3 5 6

Discounting costs a long way in the future

The use of NPV to make public-sector investment decisions gives very little

weight to the future financial burden created where large costs occur towards the

end of a project

Example:

• A project involves decommissioning costs for the public sector of $1 million in 30 years

time

Issues to consider

Page 18

time

• Discounting at 10%, the value of the cost in today’s terms is:

o Year 30: $1,000,000 / (1-10%)30 = $57,309

• $57,309 may be very in relation to the NPV of the project as a whole.

• But, $1 million will still need to be found by the public sector in 30 years to fund the

decommissioning costs at that time

Note: The higher the discount rate the more the effect of such costs is

disregarded

41 2 3 5 6

IRR & cash reinvestment

The standard IRR calculation assumes that cash taken out of a project will be reinvested at

the IRR rate until the end of the calculation period

Issues to consider

Investment C Investment D Investment C

Year Cash flow Cash flowAnnual Cash Flow reinvested @

15% to year 5

0 -1000 -1000

Page 19

IRR calculation overvalues early cashflows

1 298 0 522

2 298 0 454

3 298 0 395

4 298 0 343

5 298 2011 298

Total 492 1011 2011

NPV @ 12% 75 141

IRR 15% 15%

41 2 3 5 6

IRR & cash reinvestment

Two ways of dealing with this distortion:

Issues to consider

Modified IRR (MIRR)

• An IRR calculation with a reduced reinvestment rate for cash taken out of the project

• Cashflows reinvested at less than the IRR rate, e.g. the public-sector discount rate

Page 20

• Cashflows reinvested at less than the IRR rate, e.g. the public-sector discount rate

Payback period

• The length of time it takes for to recover the original cash investment in a project

• Supplement standard IRR calculation with ‘payback period’ – provides a useful check

41 2 3 5 6

Session agenda

1. Introduction



Page 21




51 2 3 4 6

Viability gap

• The viability gap is the shortfall in revenues between project income and what is required

to cover capital expenditure, operating expenditure and other financing requirements

necessary to make the project financially viable or financeable.

• Some country governments have set up dedicated ‘viability gap schemes’ or initiatives that

meet the funding gap required to make an economically essential project commercially

viable.

• the Government of India has instituted a Viability Gap Fund (VGF) since 2006 and the

Page 22

Government of Pakistan is currently in the process of establishing a similar initiative.

VIABILITY GAP = REVENUES - CAPEX – OPEX – FINANCING COSTS

51 2 3 4 6

The scale of the viability gap will be dependent upon a range of revenue and cost factors:

• The level of the realisable customer tariff, which in turn will be determined by:

• the public’s ability to pay; and

• the public’s willingness to pay.

• The scale of the new investment required.

• In the case of private finance or PPPs:

• private financing is typically more expensive than public and its tenor is also typically

shorter requiring faster repayment;

Causes of viability gaps

Page 23

• risk aversity amongst private financiers in the absence of any guarantee; and

• if there is no award of a terminal value at the end of a concession and the length of the

concession is much shorter than the economic life of the assets, the resulting

amortisation schedule will lead to a high annual depreciation charge and again a higher

tariff if the project is to be profitable.

• While affordability is one factor, inefficient financial structures, limited availability of financial

instruments and investor risk aversity can be major contributing factors.

51 2 3 4 6

Session agenda

1. Introduction



Page 24




61 2 3 4 5

Summary

• Project feasibility should be thought about in terms of the likely

returns on an investment

• Financial modelling of likely returns is key

• Simple metrics exist to help the assessment but very dependent on

assumptions

Page 25

assumptions

• Lack of financial viability can be tackled in different ways – what is

vital is to ensure that any proposed approach is sustainable!

61 2 3 4 5

Further sources

Online

1. India’s Viability Gap Funding Scheme:

http://www.pppinindia.com/pdf/scheme_Guidelines_Financial_Support_PPP_Infrastructure-english.pdf

2. MIT Open course on project appraisal: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/urban-studies-and-planning/11-484-

project-appraisal-in-developing-countries-spring-2005/

Books

Page 26

1. Finnerty “Project Financing: Asset-Based Financial Engineering” (1996)

61 2 3 4 5

Plenary 8: Assessing Project Feasibility · The IRR measures the rate of return on a stream of...

Documents

Transcript of Plenary 8: Assessing Project Feasibility · The IRR measures the rate of return on a stream of...